Table 1

Overview of studies on childhood psychosocial factors and incident type 2 diabetes

No.

Authors

Year

Nation/

Abbr.

N

Age

at baseline

Follow up

(years)

Risk factor

Outcome

Effect size (95% CI or SE)

(adjusted)

Study quality score1


D1 [41]

Lidfeldt

et al.

2007

USA

NHS

100,330

females

30-55

22

Father´s occupation

5 levelsa

T2DM (FPG > 140 mg/dl)˚

RR (CI) laborer vs. rest a

1.08 (0.95; 1.2)

1 (D = 0; R = 0; E = 0; O = 0, C = 1)

D2 [42]

Maty

et al.

2008

USA

ACS

5,913

17-94

34

Father´s occupation

2 levels manual/non-manual

Self-reported DM

HR (CI) for manual vs. non-manual

m 1.2 (0.8; 1.7)

w 1.7 (1.2; 2.4)

3 (D = 1; R = 1; E = 0; O = 0; C = 1)

D3 [43]

Gissler

et al.

1999

FIN

59,865

0

7

Mother´s occupation

3 levelsb

DM criteria

register based

OR (CI) for

blue-collar vs. upper white collarb

0.83 (0.5; 1.5)

3 (D = 1; R = 1; E = 1; O = 0; C = 0)

D4 [49]

Hayes

et al.

2006

UK

233

(BMI≥25)

0

50

Father´s occupation

3 levelsc

"metabolically normal" (MetS)

OR (CI) for

Class IV, V vs. I, II

m 0.2 (0.05; 0.8)*

w 0.6 (0.1; 2.7)

1 (D = 1; R = 0; E = 0; O = 0; C = 0)

D5 [47]

Langen-berg et al.

2006

UK

2,629

0

53

Father´s occupation

6 levelsd

HbA1c ( > 5,8%)

OR (CI) for lowest vs. highest class

m 1.1 (1.0; 1.8)

w 0.8 (0.5; 1.4)

3 (D = 1; R = 1; E = 1; O = 0; C = 0)

D6 [46]

Kivimäki et al.

2005

FIN

1,922

3-18

21

Parental occupation

3 levelsb

HOMA-IR

OR (CI) for change per descending CSES category

m 1.3 (1.03; 1.6)*

w 1.2 (0.98; 1.5)

4 (D = 1; R = 1; E = 1; O = 1; C = 0)


D7 [44]

Kohler

et al.

2005

MEX

6,423

50+

2

Parental education

4 levelse

Self-reported DM

OR (CI)h for mother > elementary vs. rest

0.6 (0.5; 0.8)**

2 (D = 0; R = 1; E = 1; O = 0; C = 0)

D8 [45]

Best

et al.

2005

USA

HRS

12,589

51+

4

Parental education (in years)

Self-reported DM

β (SE) regression coefficients (linear)

m 0.2 (0.1)

w 0.05 (0.1)

2 (D = 0; R = 1; E = 1; O = 0; C = 0)

D9 [50]

Goodman et al.

2007

USA

PSD

1,167

13-19

3

Parental education;

4 categoriesf

HOMA-IR

β (SE) for high school or less vs. rest

4.5 (0.78)**

3 (D = 1; R = 0; E = 1; O = 1, C = 0)


D10 [48]

Thomas

et al.

2008

UK

9,310

0

45

Childhoood adversityg

HbA1c ( > 6,0%); MetS

OR (CI) for mother: little interest in education

1.4 (0.99; 1.9)

3 (D = 1; R = 1; E = 0; O = 0; C = 1)


NHS: Nurse's Health Study

ACS: Alameda County Study

HRS: Health and Retirement Study

PSD: Princeton School District Study

T2DM: Type 2 Diabetes mellitus

DM: Diabetes mellitus

MetS: Metabolic Syndrome

HbA1c: Glycated Hemoglobin

HOMA-IR: Homeostatic Model Assessment - Insulin Resistance

Β: Beta Coefficient

HR: Hazard Ratio

OR: Odds Ratio

RR: Relative Risk

CI: Confidence Interval

SE: Standard Error

1 D Duration (1 = birth cohort or starting in youth)

R Recruitment (1 = population-based or school-based)

E Explanatory variables, (1 = risk factor assessment for CSES directly in parents, not retrospectively in adults)

O Outcome type 2 diabetes (1 = according to ADA diagnostic criteria for fasting plasma glucose)

C Confounding (1 = adjustment of age, sex, BMI, physical activity, smoking and alcohol)

a Edwards classification of social class: upper white-collar, lower white-collar, blue-collar, laborers, farmers

b As classified by Statistics Finland, 1989: upper non-manual, lower non-manual, manual,

c UK Regristrar General's Standard Occupational Classification: I u. II most advantaged; III manual; IV u. V least advantaged.

d Professional, intermediate, skilled nonmanual, skilled manual, semiskilled, unskilled.

e Without any; some elementary; completed elementary; more than elementary education (≥7years)

f Without any formal education, high school or less, some college, college graduate or higher.

g Questionnaire including abuse, physical & emotional neglect, household dysfunction

h Confidence interval self-calculated from standard error.

m = men; w = women

˚ ADA diagnostic criteria for type 2 diabetes mellitus: fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ≥ 126 mg/dl

** p < 0.01/* p < 0.05

Tamayo et al. BMC Public Health 2010 10:525   doi:10.1186/1471-2458-10-525

Open Data